Wednesday, February 13, 2013

WA lawmaker wants wolves sent to rival district

By PHUONG LE, Associated Press

Tuesday, February 12, 2013

SEATTLE
(AP) — It's not the first time someone in eastern Washington has
suggested relocating gray wolves west of the Cascades Mountains, but one
tongue-in-cheek bill introduced this year highlights real divisions
over what to do with the endangered predators.

Lamenting
that "the entire citizenship of the state has not been fully able to
enjoy the re-establishment of this majestic species," a Republican
lawmaker suggests moving some of the animals to western Washington.

"OK,
all of you who love wolves and advocate them in the state, I want you
to be able to share in all the benefits in having a wolf pack," said
Rep. Joel Kretz, R-Wauconda, who represents the northeast corner of the state where many of Washington's eight confirmed packs roam.

"It's a stupid bill, and it's a waste of our resources," said Sen. Kevin Ranker, D-Orcas Island.
Kretz's measure, House Bill
1258, suggests moving gray wolves to the Olympic Peninsula and the San
Juan Islands — a jab, Ranker noted, directed at him, since the plan
would send the animals to his district. Ranker was a vocal critic of
last fall's state-sanctioned killing of a wolf pack that had repeatedly
killed on rancher's cattle in Stevens County.

The
bill has not gotten a hearing in the Democrat-led House, but similar
sentiments have been echoed over the years as the state has wrestled
with how to handle wolves that have recolonized the state faster than
expected.

In
2008, there were only a handful of wolves. This year, there are eight
confirmed and four suspected wolf packs, numbering between 51 and 100
animals. All are on the eastern side of the state, and many in that
region have complained that they bear the burden of the state's wolf
recovery efforts.
Eastern
Washington legislators have introduced a slew of bills that would give
ranchers and local counties more leeway to deal with gray wolves.

Among
the measures, Senate Bill 5187 and House Bill 1191 would allow
livestock owners to shoot and kill wolves that threaten their livestock
without first obtaining a permit from the state.
Wolf
advocates and others oppose the measures, saying it would hurt the
state's wolf recovery efforts and contradicts years of efforts put into
hashing out a state wolf plan.

Citizens
currently can get a caught-in-the-act permit to kill wolves, but only
after the state has determined that wolves have killed or injured their
livestock. Two such permits were issued last year, though neither was
used, according to the Department of Fish and Wildlife.

"I think we all understand that the wolves are here, and they're here to stay," said Rep. Shelly Short,
R-Addy, sponsor of HB1191. "But it's disingenuous for the other side to
say 'deal with it' without giving folks over here any options."

Another
proposal, Senate Bill 5188, would allow local counties to declare that
wolves are a threat to livestock and allow local sheriffs to kill
wolves, currently the domain of the Fish and Wildlife Department.

"We should stay the course and let our quality plan guide us," Mitch Friedman,
executive director of Conservation Northwest, told lawmakers at a
hearing last month. "Change can be disruptive and wolves are bringing a
lot of drama and at times trauma. But after a time we'll adjust, and
wolves will no longer feel so new and upsetting."

Gray
wolves are protected as an endangered species throughout the state. The
animals are federally listed as endangered only in the western
two-thirds of the state.

The
state's wolf plan, approved in 2011 after three years of meetings,
requires 15 breeding pairs of wolves to be established for three years
in all regions of the state before they could be removed from endangered
status and their populations could be controlled. A breeding pair means
a male and a female raising two or more pups in a given year.

—
Senate Bill 5193/House Bill 1219 would reclassify wolves as big game
similar to bears and cougars, creates a special wolf license plate and
pays compensation for wolf kills of animals regardless of whether
they're raised for sale.

—
Senate Bill 5079 creates a dedicated general fund to compensate
ranchers for livestock losses. It passed out of committee and awaits
action by the Senate Ways and Means committee. It has support from ranching groups and some wolf advocates.

—
Senate Bill 5300 prohibits livestock owners from receiving compensation
for damages to livestock caused by wolves unless they have a
cooperative agreement with the state.

—
House Bill 1501 allows the state to compensate livestock owners at
market value for animals killed or injured by wolves and creates a
special wolf license plate, among other provisions.

—
House Bill 1337 says gray wolves can only be listed as endangered or
threatened in areas of the state where the gray wolf is also listed for
federal protection.

The film offers an abbreviated history of the relationship between wolves and people—told from the wolf’s perspective—from a time when they coexisted to an era in which people began to fear and exterminate the wolves.

The return of wolves to the northern Rocky Mountains has been called one of America’s greatest conservation stories. But wolves are facing new attacks by members of Congress who are gunning to remove Endangered Species Act protections before the species has recovered.

.

.

Inescapably, the realization was being borne in upon my preconditioned mind that the centuries-old and universally accepted human concept of wolf character was a palpable lie... From this hour onward, I would go open-minded into the lupine world and learn to see and know the wolves, not for what they were supposed to be, but for what they actually were.

-Farley Mowat, Never Cry Wolf

.

“If you look into the eyes of a wild wolf, there is something there more powerful than many humans can accept.” – Suzanne Stone